Tab 3 B-1
Membership Slate for the Board’s Standing Committee on Accessibility
PRESENTER NAME:Eric WolfBOARD MEETING: June 21, 2017
BOARD MEMBER SPONSOR NAME:TIME ALLOTTED: 15 min
ISSUE/SITUATION:Be concise- 1 or 2 sentences that get to the heart of the situation, problem or opportunity being addressed. / THE ISSUE/OPPORTUNITY IS:
The Barrier and Access Solutions Committee (BASC), the first standing committee of the State Workforce Board, has been making significant progress and is now ready to identify their voting membership, otherwise called the standing committee.They are seeking your feedback on the membership slate of their standing committee.
TAP STRATEGIC PRIORITY:
Which TAP strategic priority or priorities does this recommendation support? Can you tie to specific goals and objectives in TAP?Briefly describe these connections. If the connection is unclear, describe why this is of consequence to the Workforce Board and/or workforce system. / SUPPORTS TAP STRATEGIC PRIORITY:
This discussion will advance the priorities of the TAP priorities related to barrier removal and accessibility.
POTENTIAL IMPACT:
Effect on people, businesses, communities. What is better or different from other existing strategies? / IT IS SIGNIFICANT BECAUSE:
Appointing voting members to the standing committee reinforces the state’s strong commitment to barrier removal and allows the work of the committee to progress to identifying and committing resources to removing barriers.
OPTIMAL NEXT STEPS:
What do you really want to happen as a result of this discussion with the Workforce Board? / MY IDEAL OUTCOME OF THIS DISCUSSION IS:
Based on your feedback on whether all desired parties are included in the membership slate,the BASC chairs and staff will be able to leave the meeting with a clear sense of which people they need to coordinate with to establish the Board’s official standing committee before the Board’s September meeting.
BACKGROUND:
Short history of how this recommendation came to be. What has been tried, to what result?What evidence exists to support this recommendation? / RELEVANT BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
Both the language of WIOA and the text of Governor Inslee’s charge to the Board to implement WIOA call out the state’s responsibility to ensure services are available to all, including disadvantaged populations. The Board demonstrated their clear commitment to this charge by establishing its first formal standing committee in its August 2015 recommendation to examine accessibility issues across the state’s workforce development system, share best practices, advocate for resources to make recommended systemic changes, and assist local Workforce Development Councils (WDCs) in barrier removal.
The intent of the Board’s August 2015 recommendation was to assemble a standing committee of agency leaders and system partners who have direct ability to affect policy changes and commit resources to accessibility issues as identified.The standing committee would also receive periodic updates from a network of local accessibility advisory committees established by the same recommendation, and from those updates, identify common accessibility issues and create strategies to address them.
During TAP Implementation, the Board established an implementation committee that covered many of these functions, but did not have an official slate of voting members drawn from agency and system partners. The TAP Implementation Committee on Barrier and Access Solutions has been working to implement the three TAP goals associated with barrier removal, undertaking a population-by-population study of the experience of customers and providers from each of the community called out in legislation.Additionally, the BASC has established relationships with the local accessibility advisory committees, having visited and presented at 10 of 12 established committees by June 2017.
As the BASC implementation committee begins the process of working with local advisory committees to do its first survey of system accessibility issues, it becomes necessary to return to the voting membership of the Board’s standing committee, which shall receive the report and act upon it.After consultation with the implementation committee and partners, the co-chairs propose that the Board’s standing committee will consist of the principals or their designees from the following agency partners:
- Employment Security Department
- Department of Social and Health Services
- State Board for Community and Technical Colleges
- Department of Commerce
- Department of Veterans Affairs
- Department of Services for the Blind
- Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction
STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT, PROS AND CONS:
Which stakeholders have been engaged in the development of this recommendation? What are the pros and cons of this recommendation?According to whom (which stakeholder groups)? Are there viable alternatives to consider? / STAKEHOLDERS HAVE PROVIDED INPUT AND THEY THINK:
The BASC Implementation Committee has been consulted.
Pros include: that decision-making authority will be condensed in the hands of the agency leaders and system partners who have direct ability to affect policy change, and bring resources to bear when accessibility issues are identified.
Cons include: the high-level decision-makers that would be named to the standing committee may not always have aligned availability.
Committee staff will work with the appointees of the standing committee to identify designees to maximize attendance, and can set periodic meetings for at least a year out.
FINANCIAL ANALYSIS AND IMPACT:
What will it cost to enact this recommendation? What resources will be used? Are new resources required? How much? Where will existing or new resources come from? Are there savings to be gained from this investment? Over what period? Are there other returns on investment to consider? / THE COST AND RESOURCE NEEDS OF THIS RECOMMENDATION ARE:
No current anticipated costs.Staff anticipates meetings of the standing committee no more than quarterly; some task forces might meet intermittently to work on time-limited projects.
RECOMMENDATION AND NEXT STEPS:
What specific result do you want from the Board? Is this recommendation for discussion or action? If for discussion, will action be required at a later date?What next steps are expected after this discussion? / THE RECOMMENDATION AND/OR REQUESTED ACTION IS:
That the Board offer feedback of the voting membership slate so that staff may work with the BASC Implementation co-chairs to invite the Board’s desired partners to the standing committee.The Board will act on officially approving the membership of their standing committee at a future meeting, likely in September.